Because, Canada

[Colin]

LOL to funny

 

[Ivanhoe]

[Ivanhoe]

[Ssnake]

Semen is but a social construct.

[glenn239]

It's all just sementics, really.

[Colin]

In regards to our Esteemed leader about buying subs

[R011]

If he's serious, it won't be until after the election that they'll have any idea of the specifications they'll ask for in a competition.  If he's not, he has that as an excuse to do nothing substantive before cancelling the program quietly should he be elected.  For that matter, the Conservatives can do the same if they win claiming lack of funds.

We'll do well to get eight.  I hope we get at least three to replace the old Victorias.  I be disappointed but not surprised if we get none.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, R011 said:

If he's serious, it won't be until after the election that they'll have any idea of the specifications they'll ask for in a competition.  If he's not, he has that as an excuse to do nothing substantive before cancelling the program quietly should he be elected.  For that matter, the Conservatives can do the same if they win claiming lack of funds.

We'll do well to get eight.  I hope we get at least three to replace the old Victorias.  I be disappointed but not surprised if we get none.

Agreed

I suspect this is more about angling for an invite to AUKUS than actually addressing the RCN's need for some new subs.  

[R011]

Or diverting US criticism of our 1.3% defence spending while posturing for the upcoming election.

[Wobbly Head]

4 hours ago, R011 said:

Or diverting US criticism of our 1.3% defence spending while posturing for the upcoming election.

Trudeau cares only about Trudeau, everybody knows it and no body will trust Trudeau with any intelligence information as he will, or has released it for political gain. So any invite to AUKUS is out till he is. I can see the project being cancelled due and possibly not meeting NATO spending due to lack of funds as Canada is broke. It's going to take decades to recover from Trudeau's spending.

[Ssnake]

"There is no money"/"We're broke" is codespeak for "I can't be bothered with restructuring the budget to set priorities" or, alternatively, "I don't want to spend money on this, but I can't admit that in public".

[Wobbly Head]

19 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

"There is no money"/"We're broke" is codespeak for "I can't be bothered with restructuring the budget to set priorities" or, alternatively, "I don't want to spend money on this, but I can't admit that in public".

 Normally this would be the case but there is nothing left to restructure in the budget as suprise, suprise budgets don't Ballance themselves. Especially when having a journalist as a finance Minister, and the Prime Idiot having to form a coalition with Socialist to stay in power. The UK/France should take note as they might be going the same way.

[Rick]

Don't follow Canadian politics, but is Trudeau up for reelection this year?  

[Wobbly Head]

11 minutes ago, Rick said:

Don't follow Canadian politics, but is Trudeau up for reelection this year?  

Not till October next year if he makes it till then. Considering the Liberals just lost a safe seat in Toronto. Which would be the equivalent of the Republicans winning in Downtown New York city. This should give you an idea of his position.

[DB]

On 7/16/2024 at 3:32 AM, Argus said:

Agreed

I suspect this is more about angling for an invite to AUKUS than actually addressing the RCN's need for some new subs.  

Does the AUKUS operational requirement offer what Canada needs, I wonder.

[R011]

5 hours ago, DB said:

Does the AUKUS operational requirement offer what Canada needs, I wonder.

More defence cooperation.  invitations to conferences and banquets.  A place at a prestigious table that we don't need to do much to earn.  we aren't join9ing the sub program.  It's too expensive for our needs.

[Argus]

On 7/19/2024 at 10:12 PM, DB said:

Does the AUKUS operational requirement offer what Canada needs, I wonder.

For a given value of 'yes' 

The RCN's is/was rather like the RAN's in that rational operational analysis would suggest SSN's, it wasn't practical in the political and financial sense. AUKUS was Australia biting the bullet and recognizing a painful reality we'd been avoiding since the 60's. In the process of which creating a 'super 5-eyes' group that excluded Canada and New Zealand, and by 'excluded' I mean they weren't even briefed on it far less invited. This despite the great benefits and obvious advantages Canadian involvement would have bought across the game. There are a lot of explanations offered for this, and there's likely no single cause, but just in terms of submarines for the RCN it would have been a great deal.
Operationally Canada might like a few tweaks, like extra ice hardening on the sail perhaps, but an SSN is an SSN to some degree, any design that satisfies RN and RAN requirements is going to be in Canada's ball park. However he wider advantages make up for any minor misalignment in capabilities. Once upon a time all three navies operated the same submarines and enjoyed the benefits of commonality. This is where the UK fucked up royally with the Upholder's, they SHOULD have been designed with an eye too and direct input from the whole Oberon fleet, rather than to meet the much narrower operational role the RN could sell treasury.   

[R011]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

For a given value of 'yes' 

The RCN's is/was rather like the RAN's in that rational operational analysis would suggest SSN's, it wasn't practical in the political and financial sense. AUKUS was Australia biting the bullet and recognizing a painful reality we'd been avoiding since the 60's. In the process of which creating a 'super 5-eyes' group that excluded Canada and New Zealand, and by 'excluded' I mean they weren't even briefed on it far less invited. This despite the great benefits and obvious advantages Canadian involvement would have bought across the game. There are a lot of explanations offered for this, and there's likely no single cause, but just in terms of submarines for the RCN it would have been a great deal.
Operationally Canada might like a few tweaks, like extra ice hardening on the sail perhaps, but an SSN is an SSN to some degree, any design that satisfies RN and RAN requirements is going to be in Canada's ball park. However he wider advantages make up for any minor misalignment in capabilities. Once upon a time all three navies operated the same submarines and enjoyed the benefits of commonality. This is where the UK fucked up royally with the Upholder's, they SHOULD have been designed with an eye too and direct input from the whole Oberon fleet, rather than to meet the much narrower operational role the RN could sell treasury.   

Australia needs SSNs because of the distance from base to patrol areas off China and Indonesia.  SSKs are so slow that they'd spend nearly all their time getting there and back.  Canada doesn't need to go that far.

The only place an SSN would be really needed for Canada is the Arctic, and there's not all that much going on there that matters enough to spend the eyewatering amount of money we'd need to spend  for SSNs.  Besides, it's the USN's submarine playground and they traditionally don't like sharing.

SSKs work for us because they are good for surveillance and as clockwork mice.  For that, something a bit better than coastal is needed, but not transoceanic.

[Argus]

12 minutes ago, R011 said:

Australia needs SSNs because of the distance from base to patrol areas off China and Indonesia.  SSKs are so slow that they'd spend nearly all their time getting there and back.  Canada doesn't need to go that far.

The only place an SSN would be really needed for Canada is the Arctic, and there's not all that much going on there that matters enough to spend the eyewatering amount of money we'd need to spend  for SSNs.  Besides, it's the USN's submarine playground and they traditionally don't like sharing.

SSKs work for us because they are good for surveillance and as clockwork mice.  For that, something a bit better than coastal is needed, but not transoceanic.

Yeah but that model of operational use has been tailored to fit the RCN's cloth. SSN's are buying a whole new wardrobe. 
Range is just one way of using endurance, you get a lot more days on station with an SSN. An SSN fleet allows rapid swings between coasts for operational flexibility and maintenance, allowing force to be massed. SSN's also give you the tools to do more than just transit the arctic, its Canada's yard but everyone elses playground at the moment.  

[R011]

49 minutes ago, Argus said:

Yeah but that model of operational use has been tailored to fit the RCN's cloth. SSN's are buying a whole new wardrobe. 
Range is just one way of using endurance, you get a lot more days on station with an SSN. An SSN fleet allows rapid swings between coasts for operational flexibility and maintenance, allowing force to be massed. SSN's also give you the tools to do more than just transit the arctic, its Canada's yard but everyone elses playground at the moment.  

Unless we'd be operating on the other side of the ocean, we get decent days on station.  We're on station just leaving port!  And there is simply no way to quickly get from Halifax to Victoria whether by Alaska, Panama, or Cape Horn.  It's about 7500 nm via Panama.  About 8000 by Northwest Passage.

 

[R011]

As for everyone 's playground, there's nothing Russia or China can do there worth us spending tens of billions of dollars to stop them.  Maintaining sovereignty is much more cheaply and effectively done with boots on the ground and aircraft.

[Ivanhoe]

We need to gin up a war to drive restoration of the CDN fleet.

Do we have any operatives in, say, Ecuador?

 

[R011]

25 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

We need to gin up a war to drive restoration of the CDN fleet.

Do we have any operatives in, say, Ecuador?

 

I'm not sure we could crew a fleet as large as we did in the sixties.  We are replacing our current fridge fleet of 12 ASW ships with 15 multirole destroyers and may get up to 12 new SSK.

[Argus]

20 hours ago, R011 said:

Unless we'd be operating on the other side of the ocean, we get decent days on station.  We're on station just leaving port!  And there is simply no way to quickly get from Halifax to Victoria whether by Alaska, Panama, or Cape Horn.  It's about 7500 nm via Panama.  About 8000 by Northwest Passage.

 

Little Canada in a nut shell eh?

Quickly is relative mate, with continental powers like ours flipping coasts is never trivial, but it goes a lot faster if you can cruise at 20+ knots while saving money into the bargain.  
 

Quote

As for everyone 's playground, there's nothing Russia or China can do there worth us spending tens of billions of dollars to stop them.  Maintaining sovereignty is much more cheaply and effectively done with boots on the ground and aircraft.

Yet. We are starting to see regular traffic on the Northern Passage, and if it wasn't for the war in Ukraine we be seeing a LOT more with the Red Sea the way it is now.  The Russians are looking at shipping oil out of their arctic ports to get around their pipeline terminal issues, and the Chinese now have two shipping lines offering an Arctic route to Europe, while Maersk, MSC and Hp-Lyd are only abstaining as part of the effort against Russia. The case for the North West passage may be less, but its only growing. Canada is already getting into trilateral deal with the US and Finland on ice breakers - which to a degree looks a bit like AUKUS, I've heard suggested it should be called the American Baltic Boatbuilding Agreement .  

I did open by saying 'For a given value of yes' and I stand by it. An SSN fleet opens up a number of potentials for Canada, where or not Canada find them worth the cost is another matter. The RCN, like the RAN, have had a case for them in the past, but its up the Government at the end of the day. 

Edited August 2 by Argus

[R011]

There are much better places to spend that money. Maritime surveillance aircraft , manned and unmanned.  Improved infrastructure, readiness and training. Better housing and dependant job opportunities.

Air and drone defence systems for the Army.  More forces in Eastern Europe.  Newer and more numerous tanks.  IFVs, SPHs,MRLs etc.

SSNs are close to the bottom of any wish list.